Not that great apparently.....its much more expensive than the standard photo rag and the samples I have seen don't justify the extra cost. The prints are supposed to have a bit of a sheen to then but side by side with the normal stuff there is not a lot of difference (there is a very slight sheen in some colours if looked at an angle).In my opinion this was a disspointing paper from Hahnemule and I would stick with the standard photorag or wait for the new pearl if you are after something with a bit more of a finish.

I prefer HPR Satin over HPR when I need dark blacks. The downside is a more limited dynamic range (less details in shadows).Petter,There are a lot of canned profiles around that push down blacks by compressing shadows. I am not saying this is the case here,and I have not used this paper, but I am suggesting that you should get a good custom profile. On your other comment I personally have found Hahnemuhle paper very consistent and free of coating faults apart from a tendency for flaking on the PhotoRag .Cheers,Brian Gilkeswww.pharoseditions.com.au.

Petter,There are a lot of canned profiles around that push down blacks by compressing shadows. I am not saying this is the case here,and I have not used this paper, but I am suggesting that you should get a good custom profile.

Thanks but that's not the case here. I use my own custom made profiles as well as the profiles that Colorbyte makes for their RIP which I use (ImagePrint).

But when talking about profiles I've found the PhotoRag Satin profile from Hahnemuehles own page to be very strange - not to say bad/faulty. It shows some serious banding in certain colours. So custom made is the way to go.

But still the paper itself is a beauty, in my opinion.

(About Hahnemuehles general quality... I haven't experienced much flaking when printing on "standard" PhotoRag but when I've printed on their William Turner paper it has been quite a problem. WT is yet another lovely paper, but with issues... similar to an interesting but challenging relationship )